On 07/09/06, Brianna Laugher brianna.laugher@gmail.com wrote:
What about version 2: instead of applying to all registered trademarks, apply to all registered trademarked logos. This should remove the ridiculous cases like you mentioned above (car body shapes, landscape, device designs etc). But still includes Pringles boxes & German logos.
I think it's the wrong place to apply a policy.
If the usage is the problematic thing, we can't protect people from using something in a way that contradicts local law, any more than we can stop them from reusing a GFDL image in print without reprinting the entire GFDL next to it. A licence template does not constitute legal advice either, and we can't guarantee something marked with a particular licence is in fact under that licence - do we remove all images the Foundation doesn't have signed paper on? (i.e., operate at the level of assurance the FSF operates at.)
Ultimately we can only be people's mothers to a certain extent.
Commons was conceived as a service project for the Wikipedias, then people started treating it as an area to make a personal name for themselves on as if it were a wholly separate entity; if the second group of people make it useless for the first purpose, then we would have to duplicate the service project aspect. Which strikes me as ridiculous.
- d.